IS IT TIME TO DECLARE WAR
What is the authorization of force? Is there a current authorization of force and should it be changed? Is it time to begin conducting court at GITMO? How many non-Muslims have been killed? How many Muslims have been killed? Who should we declare war on or who should we authorize military force against? Has anyone declared war on us?
WHO CAN DECLARE WAR: Article I of the Constitution invests Congress with the authority to declare war and to raise and maintain military forces. In this system, Congress decides whether to fight, and the President as Commander in Chief manages the fight authorized by Congress. The last time the United States declared War was WWII.
Congress holds the power to declare war. The President cannot declare war without Congressional approval. As the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, Presidents have sent troops to battle without an official declaration (which happened in Vietnam and Korea).
WAR POWERS ACT: The War Powers Resolution (also known as the War Powers Resolution of 1973 or the War Powers Act) (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) is a federal law intended to check the President’s power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress.
Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to address these concerns and provide a set of procedures for both the President and Congress to follow in situations where the introduction of U.S. forces abroad could lead to their involvement in armed conflict.
HOW DOES AMERICA FIGHT WITH OUT DECLARING WAR: Since the War Powers Act Congress has Authorized Use of Military Force (AUMF) several times. The most recent was signed into law by President George Bush September 2001.
The authorization granted the President the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
IS THE SEP 2001 AUMF STILL VALID: Many argued during President Obama’s term that he was not authorized under the September 2001 AUMF and certainly claim President Trump is not authorized. I think this AUMF needs to be rescinded immediately followed by an updated version relevant to the situation we face today.
WHO OR WHAT WOULD THE TARGET OF A NEW AUMF BE: Radical Islam would be the target. Those who argue against the current AUMF claim that it was only for Afghanistan. The mind set of too many world leaders is they think in terms of land & countries.
RADICAL MUSLIM’S ARE JELLO: I was interviewed by a Chicago radio station in 2006 and asked if we were winning in Iraq or what would happen if we won. I said that defeating radical Muslim Jihad in one geographic location was like placing a square of Jell-O on a bench and hitting it with a maul. The Jell-O is no longer on the bench but now it is everywhere. There is still the same amount of Jell-O. Radical Muslim Jihad is exactly the same as that square of Jell-O, it is now spread. Some have said fighting this hateful concept is like the game Whack-A-Mole.
WHO & WHERE ARE THEY: A few of the groups in Africa are Al-Shabab, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), El-Mourabitoun, Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), The Sons of the Islamic Sahara Movement for Justice, BOKO HARAM, Ansar al-Muslimin in the Lands of the Blacks (JAMBS), Ansar al-Sharia in Libya & Tunisia. Let’s not forget Southeast Asia and the Brotherhood of Terrorism Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) have trained with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in camps in the southern Philippines. Other groups in Asia do not appear on the US State Department list of Islamic terrorists such as PULO, Gerakan Mujahideen Islam Pattani (GMIP), Kampulan Militan Malaysia (KMM), Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI), Laskar Jihad, Indonesian Islamic Liberation Front (IILF) and the MILF to name a few.
Let’s not forget Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and of course ISIS. NOTE: Because America abandoned Iraq in 2011 Iran filled that void. Expect that Iran will now have a direct road route to resupply Hezbollah as things settle down in Iraq & Syria.
REMEMBER: These groups have declared war on anyone who does not believe as they believe. You might not be at war with them but they most certainly are at war with you & your way of life. These groups are also at war with the majority of Muslims and their desire to live peacefully.
WHY TARGET RADICAL ISLAM: Radical Islam is more dangerous to other Muslims than to anyone else. That is a true statement because frequently the radical Muslim begins their Jihad within their own Muslim community (anywhere in the world). They accuse other Muslims of not believing correctly and threaten or kill them in order to persuade or intimidate other Muslims.
Many say that the majority of Muslims are good. I do not argue that fact because a Jihad is not just a holy war. Jihad is described as a struggle or effort. Jihad can be a believer’s internal struggle to live as well as they can. Jihad can also be the struggle to build a good Muslim society.
AUTHORIZATION USE OF MILITARY FORCE: Rescind the current AUMF and create a new one that authorized military force anywhere in the world to defeat and kill radical Muslim Jihadist. Radical Muslims do not recognize borders but they recognize that they are authorized to wage war and kill non-believers. Non-believers are also other Muslims; never lose sight of that fact.
HOW IT WORKS: The new AUMF does not state an area it specifies a radical ideology, authorizing kinetic military action, seizing financial assets and interdictive internet action. Remember these groups have plenty of money gained by drug trafficking, human trafficking and kidnapping for ransom. Radical Islam does not recognize borders and neither should the world.
EXAMPLE OVERSEAS: Let’s say that a new group goes to a country and pays the ruler a certain amount of money to look the other way but allow them free movement and use of an area for, training and as a headquarters. Once discovered America would partner with that countries government by offering more money for a longer period of time. America would either work with military from that country or just go in and remove the group by kill or capture. In the case of capture the enemy combatants would go to Guantanamo Bay (GITMO) for questioning and if charged to face a military tribunal.
EXAMPLE IN THE UNITED STATES: The director of the FBI, Christopher A. Wray appeared in front of Congress December 2017 and stated that there are about 1,000 terrorism cases in America in every state. Recently a 2011 immigrant from Bangladesh tried to blow up a pipe bomb and said that he was trying to replicate a 2016 Christmas truck attack in Europe and also said he was retaliating for US airstrikes on ISIS in Syria.
Under the new AUMF this person would be identified as an enemy combatant and taken to GITMO. REMEMBER: the Authorization of Force is against an ideology not a territory.
LEGAL OR NOT: This action will be challenged by the ACLU because the person might be a legal immigrant. What will give these actions teeth is writing a new comprehensive immigration law. It is not acceptable to wage war on America and those that wage war need to be treated as enemy combatants.
REMEMBER THE BARBARY PIRATES: It is 1786 and Thomas Jefferson & John Adams are in London to meet with the ambassador for the Barbary Pirates. These pirates were hijacking American shipping and enslaving and demanding ransoms to free the American sailors. Jefferson told Secretary of State John Jay what Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman said. Adams and Jefferson asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported:
The ambassador answered us that (THE RIGHT) was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to paradise.
CONCLUSION: I am not saying Muslims are bad, but I am saying that Muslims who support radical Jihad are part of a large army and are a danger to the world. These enemy combatants need not be born in a Muslim country they may have been born in England, Canada, France, Philippines, S. Africa or any other country to include America. If America takes the lead other countries will partner either by sharing intelligence or active military participation.